Hacker News Reader

Comment by petcat | Hacker News Reader

We're talking about Germany shuttering their nuclear power plants despite USA warning them repeatedly that Russia was going to weaponize the Nord Stream gas dependence against them. Which is ultimately exactly what happened.

View on HN

Nuclear power replaced coal in Germany, not gas. A big dependence exists because people heat their homes with gas and lots of industry needs gas, nuclear doesn’t help with either.

Russian gas replaced Germany's own nuclear power. That's where the risk was and why the Nord Stream pipelines were so controversial.

But Germany wanted the cheap gas, so they ignored the risks and Russia ultimately invaded Ukraine.

It's a bit more complex, I think. When gas imports started from the USSR, nuclear power plants were still being built in Germany, for example. There were gas imports for a long time.

That is not really the case. Germany certainly wanted cheap gas, but there was also the theory that integrating Russia economically will prevent conflicts. While ultimately a wrong decision, it was not entirely stupid.

But regarding gas, one has to understand that a tiny fraction (15%) of gas is used for electricity and most for heating. So nuclear power is completely irrelevant here.

I also would like people realize that many nuclear plants in Europe and elsewhere still depend on fuel from Russia. So energy dependence is a bit more complex.

> But regarding gas, one has to understand that a tiny fraction (15%) of gas is used for electricity and most for heating. So nuclear power is completely irrelevant here.

You know that homes can be heated with electricity from nuclear power? The reason why Germany uses gas for heating is because it was historically very cheap compared to electricity, because it came from Russia. Good, while the attached strings could be ignored..

Sure, but we are talking about what was the reality in Germany. And gas was and is needed mainly for heating (and also industry), so shutting down the nuclear plants did not increase dependency on Russian gas despite what people repeatedly claim. Also gas usage for power production did not increase afterwards, while Russian gas imports were stopped. Both simple facts contradicting this myth.

That’s BS, Gas is used for heating and industry ovens not for energy production.

Germany runs gas-fired power plants for electricity production.

If Germans don't or didn't want, e.g., nuclear power plants, or fracking, or transmission lines, or ... then they are allowed to decide that way, no?

if the germans want to shoot themselves in the foot they are allowed to do this, yes. what is the point of your comment? it's not even remotely relevant.

I was trying to point out that societies make and are free to make decisions that others don't like or that aren't great for them by some metric - and that there is nothing wrong with that. Why is that not relevant when it comes to energy?

so your point is that it's fine that germany ceeded energy independence and gave power to russia, because they're a country and countries have the 'right' to make bad decisions?

we have the right to criticise countries too right?

If Germans don't want energy independence - you can criticize that but that's how nation states work or is there some UN Charter violation in there, for example?

im still so confused what your point is. it's like talking about the consequences of someone's alcoholism, and someone chiming in "well they have a right to die of the booze if they want" like...ok???

So any nation state needs to be energy independent? Is that your point? Or have cheap energy and energy independence? If people want low growth, expensive energy etc., why is that like alcoholism? What is intrinsically bad there? Not like life expectancy in Germany is low, for example.

are you german?

Are you? Trying to understand your position... the only good policy is energy independence?

Edit: what is your point? Being able to criticize? Sure, but so what?

there is no position, you're imagining arguments people aren't making.

> So any nation state needs to be energy independent?

It is obviously a good thing if a democratic nation state is independent from a totalitarian dictatorship.

> Not like life expectancy in Germany is low, for example.

It's not about life expectancy. They now have to make a choice between supporting an aggressive totalitarian state vs. suffering damage to their economy due to higher energy prices. That is obviously a bad position to be in.

Why is using domestic energy sources much more not another choice now or in the recent past?

And yet, Germany did quickly stop importing gas from Russia, while various other countries still depend on nuclear fuel from Rosatom.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com